Avatar 2

pixelburp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120074841#Comment_120074841

The difference between MCU CGI finales and Avatar 2s own are not a problem of the tool, but the execution and prowess thereof. Always has been and would never blame the CGI in of itself, or the artists behind it, but how and where its used - or indeed who directs those scenes. Or doesn't, as we know with "PreVis". Pillorying "CGI finale" is just shorthand for something larger - and outside the topic of this thread really.

So yes, I'll continue to trash MCU finale's while they remain shíte, and while James Cameron shows us how well they can sing when a master - and not a harangued, pressured and undersold render farm - conducts the work.

sherrupyew

While we're on the topic of MCU Vs Avatar approach. Here's a very interesting thread:

https://twitter.com/metaplexmovies/status/1611030533986729986?t=9x2vjfcfN5IbGeQnWCfXHA&s=19

Essentially, the films are made in very different ways. MCU films are mostly designed shot-by-shot before they are filmed, even without director involvement. Avatar is driven by performance and direction first, and the visual choices are then built around that. This is more reminiscent of old-school blockbuster filmmaking. More room for improv and spontaneity, with an emphasis on emotion.

Not dumping on MCU, I find the films can be fun. But I do find for my tastes, they lack dramatic tension as the constraints are very apparent. I was not aware of how little power Marvel directors have in shaping the visual outcome. This hyper-controlled approach has served them well until now, but I think this is now what people are referring to when they talk of "Marvel fatigue".

I would love to see MCU absorb some of the lessons on this from Avatar and not be so risk-averse. I watched Wakanda Forever and was amazed by how bad the lighting was. I looked it up and it turns out this is in part due to Marvel's standardized low contrast filming specifications, which enables a faster/cheaper CGI pipeline. Would love to see them let go of some of these constraints and let good filmmakers inject a bit of soul and creativity into the proceedings.

johnny_ultimate

If an MCU finale ever features a series of shots as incredible as the ones in which yer man loses his arm in this one, then we can talk :)

SuperBowserWorld

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120075291#Comment_120075291

Yep! The build up to that was shocking and the payoff was worth it.

I bet he will be back. (I'll be back 😉)

Moby dick.

pixelburp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120075291#Comment_120075291

What astounded and delighted most was after wondering "wait, they're not going to rip it off and show it? They wouldn't, would they??"...

... They did!

johnny_ultimate

The cut to the final wide shot in that sequence may just be my favourite edit of 2022.

Foxtrol

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120075254#Comment_120075254

I should buy a lotto ticket tonight...

I'm sure the response will be that 'well Avatar had a good CGI battle' but that isn't the bar that is set for MCU, again the mere inclusion of it is enough to bring on ire.

Visually I agree the finale in Avatar 2 was great, however it contained an enormous plot hole that took away some of the enjoyment for me - where the hell the island tribe went to. They were a key part of the battle and then just totally conveniently disappeared without any sort of attempt at an explanation. It wasn't as if there wasn't plenty of fat in the movie that they could have cut if necessary to give 30 seconds to make the finale make sense.

pixelburp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120075613#Comment_120075613

I think Avatar 2 had a good finale - the CGI was immaterial. That's the difference I'm trying to get across; what happened, why did it happen - not how was it made.

The disappearing tribe was a flaw, and a weird one at that. I suspect it's something left on the cutting room floor, or "explained" by the ring of fire that trapped the Silly family (though I think that happened long after the attack started).

I'd be shocked if someone as detail oriented as Cameron just forgot.

Foxtrol

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120075287#Comment_120075287

I dont think the lesson is to be less risk averse. MCU's worst movies for most have been when they've given directors more freedom, e.g., Eternals and Thor 3. The problem for superhero movies is that for the most part the audience knows the main characters wont be dying, while in Avatar everyone was fair game, given most of the audience came out not knowing the name of most characters.

Interesting choice for the tweet to include two shots from Endgame as an example of a film with lack of emotion. During my packed screening of Avatar 2 I didn't hear a single crowd reaction and no videos have popped up of them either. However every Endgame screening I went to plus numerous videos online included real raw emotion from the audience - be it happiness or sadness. Similarly with the finale of Infinity War, the other shots in the tweet, I heard far more audience reactions.

Again, no arguments that visually Avatar 2 easily beats MCU movies but it isn't too surprising given he has been working on it for 13 years and had a far larger budget for CGI. The two franchises are really apples and oranges so there isn't really that much to be gained by trying to play them against each other.

sherrupyew

I think we'll have to agree to disagree on that. I'm not someone who has watched all the Marvel movies so didn't feel much emotion personally. But totally agree Thor 3 was absolutely horrendous, not sure what was going on there.

I'm not sure audience reaction videos tell you much. I mean just search YouTube and you'll find plenty for Avatar. I am one of the people who left the theatre in silence. Not sure what that means... different types of fans?

The extremely abnormal box office trajectory of Avatar is fairly explicit proof of a film working it's magic on broad audiences across the world. People are going back to see it again, telling their friends and family. I'm not sure it can be credibly argued that it's not having the intended effect.

Foxtrol

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120075683#Comment_120075683

It would be a ridiculous thing to end up on the cutting room floor, especially given the huge amount of fat in the movie elsewhere (albeit very pretty looking fat).

The ring of fire makes no sense either, they've shown how deep the characters can dive and how the creatures can get somewhat airborne. Even afterwards when they escaped the fire there was still no tribe waiting for them - they just totally vanished.

Can only think that Cameron couldn't make it work cleanly logically without impacting a bunch of other scenes and emotional beats that would hurt later movies, like the tribe saving the daughter heading back home and then leaving the Sully's to fend for themselves.

Rather than having to explain in a way that doesn't really stand up, like having a shot the tribe outside of the fire trying to get in, Cameron just hoped the audience would ignore it. Not like he doesnt have some priors - say a door that could easily fit two people.

sherrupyew

Ahem...

https://www.npr.org/2022/12/19/1144078509/titanic-movie-door-debate-james-cameron

I love that we're discussing the physics of a ring of fire in a movie that's about people inserting their consciousness into 10 foot tall alien cat people. Creative license!

Foxtrol

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120075772#Comment_120075772

I'm not arguing it isn't successful - it clearly is.

A successful movie however doesn't mean there isn't flaws - not to drag up MCU again, but the success of Endgame didn't mean it had perfect CGI or issues with plot etc.

Success just means people want to see it, it doesn't tell us why or even how good the movie is.

I've seen plenty of movies recently with much better and unique plots, better, more interesting characters, far tighter editing, or were simply more fun than Avatar 2 but I haven't told my friends if they want to see them they must do it in the cinema but I have in this case (on top of that to spend more and go to the best screen they can get to). That isn't because Avatar 2 doesn't have issues but because it is stunning and I think the falloff in quality and the other issues far more noticeable when it is on the small screen. Add to that to how little competition it has in the cinema right now, the poor weather, and it is a perfect storm from it to do huge numbers.

With a far shorter break before the next movie, it'll be interesting to see if the novelty factor potentially drops off. I'd hope for a big improvement on other areas or I feel it will struggle. To be fair, I had no faith in this one doing well so what do I know.

pixelburp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120075828#Comment_120075828

To be fair, it's probably the most glaring hole in the finale, but one that only really rose after I disconnected from the immediacy of the emotion within the set-piece. The other Na'Vi warriors just disappeared once the Main Characters got on the ship and found themselves in peril. It is a legitimate wonder, though not enough to sink the efficacy of the whole multi-location set-piece.

sherrupyew

Legitimate wonder for sure. But all films require the viewer to suspend belief in a variety of ways - and I can't say I gave these factors much thought until they were mentioned here. Like with the other Na'vi warriors, I just assumed the area of the battle scene was very large, and we were just staying focused on one area featuring the main characters.

I mean, it's quite easy to split hairs like this. Do I actually care whether or not Jack could have theoretically fit on the door with Rose? Not at all. In my view, to focus on a detail like this is to miss the point. It's relatively unimportant.

Cameron's films have always been much more about capturing broad emotional strokes and relatable themes than cerebral intricacy (like Christopher Nolan, for example). It is what it is, and I'm here for it!

ricimaki

I really enjoyed this. I was skeptical going into a 3+ hour long movie, and whilst a lot of it could probably be cut without impacting the story, I'm glad they didn't. The story might not be the strongest, but who cares. The movie is a thing of beauty, with by far the best visuals and overall immersion into a world I've ever seen.

Odeon Casteltroy Screen 1 shows it in HFR (despite not advertising it anywhere...). I found it noticeable in the early action/fast paced scenes, until it just wasn't, as it felt correct, along with the incredible 3D and animation quality. There was a couple of times I noticed the drop back to 24 FPS as scenes changed, but I do notice frame rate changes quite easily...

If all you care about is story, you might be better off avoiding this. However, if you want the greatest cinema experience you'll likely see for the next few years, watch this in 3D HFR.

Greyfox

Seen it today, brilliant, as already said the action in the last 3rd was absolutely superb

ancapailldorcha

I liked it. I wanted to love it but maybe I was just a bit young when I saw the original. As far as I can discern, it's Avatar but with water. It's fine but I felt it could have been more.

Homelander

The story, as with the first movie, is pretty weak but credit where it's due, Cameron knows how to make and pace a movie - and the action scenes are very impressive.

I enjoyed it, mainly for the visuals though the simple story was reasonably compelling and the cast are good. It's just massively entertaining and it looks phenomenal in 3D. I honestly think you'd be doing yourself a major disservice seeing it on a normal screen.

walkonby

I watched this in the imax in cineworld and I thought there were HFR sequences but see others in this thread thought there weren’t? I didn’t notice shifts between scenes but I was sure the entire last action set piece was. Particularly as I noticed (or thought I noticed) two things that were common to hfr with the hobbit 1) cgi character models look way more natural in hdr and 2) human characters in costumes look too real and a bit silly (Spider in his breathing mask and leotard).

sherrupyew

I didn't notice human characters looking awkward here, whereas I did with the first film.

I was at Cineworld IMAX and I think the fact that I couldn't determine if it was HFR or not suggests that it wasn't - or at least not the predominant variable frame rate format. I would usually be quite sensitive to visual elements and I couldn't spot any changes.

I know what you mean though, it was so clear and immersive it seemed like *something* had been done to improve the experience. I really didn't notice frame rate judder as I have in the past with 3D films.

It's likely this is due to Cameron's experience capturing 3D motion. But I also genuinely wonder if there are different formats out there for testing purposes. I really have no idea what format that was in, and Cineworld are unable to clarify, but I was very glad it was the format I watched it in. Zero complaints.

Black Sheep

Saw Avatar: The Way of Water today and we all enjoyed it as light entertainment. I'm not sure it's one I'd be rushing to rewatch but I'd be curious what the kids think, I must ask them in due course and see if it made a bigger impression on them.

Visually I felt like the original Avatar had held up pretty well on the re-watch, but I have to give credit for the water FX in the new movie, I did think they really succeeded there in conveying... Well... A great sense of wetness, I guess? Who am I to say that isn't whatever multi million dollar FX budget well spent....

Plot-wise I thought it was fine, a lot of proven tropes and subplots in there. It's fun. Colonisers BAD, indigenous spiritual people GOOD. Heroic white people helping the indigenous spiritual people also GOOD (...Of course..). Animals always GOOD except predatory alien shark who is obviously BAD and gets mashed into a rock.

I give them major kudos for introducing the Sully family characters and sentient whales and basically none of them fall into Jar Jar Binks territory.

I've read pieces talking about how Cameron is depicting a kind of ecological spirituality in the movie, and Americans are writing serious articles about how it's 'deep green religion'. To be honest I thought it was pretty paper-thin... Not different to mumbo jumo about 'The Force' in George Lucas movies. It was the kind of fortune cookie spirituality that you get in kids Saturday morning cartoons, and that's fine, but it's bizarre to me that adults would try to suggest that there is anything deep and meaningful going on here.

What did work in terms of messaging? The anti-whaling portion was very effective, I think he landed that blow really well.

I found it a bit weird how Cameron wholesale transplanted Maori / Polynesian / South Sea culture and made that the template for the Sea Tribe that Sully and his family found sanctuary with. I mean, I know they used Maori actors in many of the roles, but they literally made them 'Space Maori'.... Completely with Ta Moko tattooing and some of the grass shawls and so on you'd see in Maori historical imagery.

When Avatar first came out the big thing was that Cameron was showing us another world, an Alien world... This seemed a bit at odds with that.

Did they slightly shrink the Na'vi to make them more like humans? I know we had shorter-statured Na'vi children in this movie, but I really felt like they shaved a few inches off the Na'vi this time around.

Also, I did notice where the tribal warriors vanished to in the final sequence. It might make more sense if they had been shown to be driven off - with great reluctance - by very heavy casualties.

pixelburp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120112967#Comment_120112967

Hard not to think the entire subplot with the whale, and the comically evil whalers in general, was Cameron's more obvious author-insert in terms of his ideologies and views. Given his background and (manic?) enthusiasm for the ocean, you'd have to imagine it was borderline cathartic for him to write the whole sequence of that rogue whale trashing the ship & its occupants - the topper being the captain getting his arm ripped off. TBH I can't argue with that approach either: people criticise the lack of depth in Cameron's writing but sometimes it's fun to boo unashamed bad-guys.

The mystical element rang really hollow, and TBH couldn't shake the cynicism that it was exactly the kind of unhelpful cod mysticism beloved of those who indulge in exoticism with regards indigenous peoples. Oh they're so spiritual and understand the earth - they're at onnnnnne with nature. Teach us how to love mother Earth Pandora you beautiful savages. Though I do read that Avatar 3: The Search for More Money will have an "evil" Na'Vi tribe, so at least we'll get what passes for nuance with more morally questionable natives.

TheIrishGrover

So film three is going to be Fire....

Seriously, I know, I know, Earth, Water, Air, Fire are the ancient four elements but c'mon. They are THIS close to calling them:

Avatar: Book1 - Air

Avatar: Book 2 - Water

Avatar: Book 3 - Fire

And "Air" are going to be the "Baddie" Na'Vi apparently.

So, when Netflix come out with their Live Action Avatar: The Last Airbender series, people are gonna go "Wait, what? What a ripoff" 😀

ancapailldorcha

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120115225#Comment_120115225

I like "The Search for More Money".

Isn't this some sort of passion project for Cameron though? Odd to have such a derivative sequel.

pixelburp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120115780#Comment_120115780

I can't claim that one as my own.

It is a passion project, but as I opined myself a page or two back, Cameron's writing and characterisation has always been quite derivative. It's possibly a reflection on where pop culture exists now that more nuance or complexity (if only for its own sake) is expected from Blockbuster cinema. That cutouts won't do anymore.

But then maybe it's just that because this particular world is so notedly foreign, so completely lacking in automatic emotional reference points for the viewer, folks notice the joins a little more than - say - the various clichés running around a sinking ocean liner, or the roughneck tropes abound onboard that underwater drilling platform.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aN8wxQDqfRk

Mitch Connor

so the army guys come in, and need to stop Jake from leading raids against them.

They send 1 team after him, and he goes into hiding - immediately giving them the exact result they were looking for. the actual hunting of him is essentially just a personal vendetta and pretty disconnected from the cares of the invading army. and we don't know if the forest na'vi stopped the raids or were obliterated after Jake and family went into hiding.

sherrupyew

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120115225#Comment_120115225

My out-there theory on the "mystical element" is that James Cameron is mad about ayahuasca...

Seriously, there's a whole deleted sequence from the first film where Jake goes on a massive trip:

https://youtu.be/Ud-0j4sU7Bs

A lot of the spiritual ideology is very much in line like the sort of overwhelming, trite-but-true wisdom you get from such an experience.

I don't think it's a cynical contrivance, just an unashamedly sincere expression of nature-based, back-to-basics spirituality.

walkonby

I was left wondering if they ever did mine the unobtanium deposit under the Home Tree, since unobtanium was never mentioned (all that ridiculing of the name 11 years ago clearly had an effect).

Mitch Connor

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120115960#Comment_120115960

we know nothing about the mining operations at all in Avatar 2, weirdly.

Thought it is clear Avatar 1 was JC talking about deforestation and Avatar 2 is about ocean polution/whaling. Its the reason he makes these movies. More people will watch Avatar two than will watch a JC documentary about the whaling industry.

And, being honest, I found the 'whale' hunting sequence very hard to watch - exactly as he intended.

Black Sheep

Yeah the whale hunting sequence was brutal ... Genuinely.

If I was writing an evil na'vi plot ... One route would be to go with the idea that colonisers always use indigenous populations against each other.

They can be just as brutal in pursuit of the extermination of ancestral enemies.

So we have a tribe colluding with humans on that basis.

I mean if you read about native American tribes fighting each other and settlers ... Absolutely savage stuff went down.

The problem is the 'world mind' stuff the tribes have does seem to genuinely make it tricky for them to be as short sightedly evil as humans in history. Their afterlife is kind of tangibly there...

But I guess you could have a religious extremist tribe who believe only they should have permission to link with the 'world mind'? Kind of a purity thing.

If Earth is dying I guess worth keeping in mind that number 3 presumably ends with a peace deal between humans and na'vi...

Sudden Valley

I did like the movie and think it is best watched in the cinema but I didn't recommend to anyone else as I felt the running time was bloated and made the experience (especially after the 2.5 hours mark) just unenjoyable.

Given how it was an original script and not an adaptation of a long book I can't see why Cameron keeps making long Avatar movies.

Mitch Connor

they were mentioning about humans not believing in the great balance, so I reckon the 'bad' na'vi will be ones that upset the great balance. if they are Fire based, I would think maybe a 'clensing' of the land to make way for new growth (them expanding)

Also have to think the Colonel fella is gonna have a redemption arc through 3 and 4. And the daughter is going to be revealed to be the 'great mother' incarnate.

ancapailldorcha

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120116158#Comment_120116158

It's ultimately more Avatar and you can easily make a decision that way. For me, I knew there'd be a decent spectacle and I never see stuff in 3D so I thought I'd make the exception. Wished it was better but it's not going to be the worst thing I see this year.

NoviGlitzko

Seen it in IMAX 3D and was blown away. This and the original Avatar captured my imagination more than any other movie while at the pictures.

In a generation of utter pretentious filmmaking, it's great to know that we have at least one director who delivers a no frills blast of a movie.

flazio

Seen it in standard 3d last night and thought it was only so-so. Same baddie, very similar set up, new characters whose names are very forgettable (not helped by calling each other "bruh" all the time).

kerplun k

2 Billion and counting.

Im in awe of James Cameron. Think he epitomises the saying that one should believe in themselves. In a couple of weeks he’ll have 3/5 of the top grossing movies of all time. That’s some feat.

pixelburp

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120143542#Comment_120143542

Where'd you see that? Boxofficemojo still lists the worldwide as 1.97 billion...

James Cameron is king, but I do wish this latter section of his career wasn't dominated by one, slightly wiffy franchise. He must have a tonne of script ideas he could have worked on (ignoring terrible ones like that infamous Spider-Man script).

Sam Worthington must be over the moon. His Hollywood career basically died 10-15 years ago and here he is lead character in the world's biggest movie.

SuperBowserWorld

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120138902#Comment_120138902

Yep, the dialogue is atrocious in places.

kerplun k

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120144684#Comment_120144684

https://variety.com/2023/film/news/avatar-2-billion-global-box-office-1235498281/

Headline from Variety. Must admit that I haven't actually read the article.

I think it's a testament to James Cameron that he can take something like Avatar and turn it into a bonafide hit.

johnny_ultimate

By the end of the week it looks like Cameron will have three of the four top-grossing films. He's some lad.

B.A._Baracus

Saw it tonight and its alright. Its not bad but not great. Would say Avatar 1 was better of the two.

But I think they are going for "The Matrix Finish" cause once they said the earth is dying the series will end with peace between both Navi and Humans living on Pandora. Also that new substance those pesky humans are after will come into play next movie as well. But since the humans have only been mining it for one year, it would indicate a time jump in one of the sequels. Allow for a character to "not age" as they said.

flazio

https://www.boards.ie/discussion/comment/120144971#Comment_120144971

The fact that they are two films each of two different franchises skews this a bit but Zoe Saldaña is the first actor to star in 4 films that broke 2 billion in the box office (Avatar 1 and 2 and Avengers Infinity War and Endgame)

pixelburp

It's really weird Saldana hasn't headlined more vehicles. She seems famous enough that she's working at a high tier of mainstream Hollywood but nobody appears interested to put her front and centre of something. Could be her own desire of course. Especially as in those two franchises she's playing action leads, the sidestep seems obvious.

She appeared for five minutes in that awful The Adam Project, and I was like "oh cool, Zoe Saldana is gonna add some actio... oh she's gone"

Sad Professor

Variety reports Avatar 3 delayed by a year until Dec 2025. The fourth and fifth films also delayed until 2029 and 2031 respectively. Not entirely surprising news as Saldana recently suggested that Avatar 3 is a long way from finished and by Jimbo's own admission 4/5 may not happen.

https://variety.com/2023/film/news/disney-star-wars-delays-marvel-avatar-sequel-release-dates-1235642363/

johnny_ultimate

Is it really Avatar without a year or three delay here and there?